Croydon Cosmetic Clinic

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as Good.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The clinic made sure patients were at the centre of their care and treatment choices.

Our review of clinical records showed people were supported to understand their individual condition, the expectations of treatment and were involved in planning their care.

Staff spoke clearly about building relationships with patients and delivering bespoke individual treatment plans.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff understood the potential of the health and care needs of people who chose to use to access the clinic.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Staff communicated and provided information in ways that supported patients to understand their treatment. They gave patients details about their health and treatment options to enable informed decision-making.

Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. This included patient surveys and a suggestion box in the clinic. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made because of patient feedback, including complaints.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

From the feedback collected by the service which we reviewed, patients reported timely access to initial assessment and treatment.

Waiting times, delays and cancellations were minimal and managed appropriately.

The service was based on the first floor of a building with no lift. Potential patients were made aware of what reasonable adjustments could be made, and we heard examples of some adjustments made. Outside of the service’s opening hours, patients had access to support by telephone.

Croydon Cosmetic Clinic is a private self-funding aesthetic clinic. Staff and leaders identified people who may need additional support to use the service, such as written information in a larger font size.

Before providing treatment, patients attended for a consultation, where the clinician discussed with them the risks and benefits of any treatment and answered any questions.

Feedback provided by people using the service was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

Croydon Cosmetic Clinic is a private aesthetic clinic. This quality statement, about long-term care decisions, is not relevant for this service. People were provided with information about what to do if they required support post-appointment and any other future options.